Alright, I'm just about wrapping up the first batch of changes. Any new ones or repeats of things you want to see implemented go in here. If you don't see yours on the patchnotes, keep trying :3 The next batch will be Monday the 12th.

Here's the rules again:

-Each player only gets to suggest one conceptual change to one unit in each one of the change threads.-Do not suggest changes in excess of 10% to a single unit more often than once a patch.(I will actually amend this slightly. If you believe the unit is really UP and believe it needs a radical buff, you can suggest more radical changes than 10%. But things that are currently OP or mainstream will not get more than 10% changes)

You get infinite +1's on other people's changes and are, in fact, encouraged to +1 suggestions you like as this will make it more likely for them to be included. You are welcome to debate any other suggestions in the thread.

This will be the template for change suggestions

Unit:Stat:Previous Amount:Desired Amount:Reasoning:

Unit: Name of the unit you want to changeStat: The specific stat you want to changePrevious Amount: How much it was beforeDesired Amount: How much you want it to beReasoning: Why should this change be included

As you might notice, the balancing will be limited only to stats. Any kind of structural or mechanical changes will take a lot more time and will not be considered at this time. As James mentioned, some stats will require a more involved patching process than others, so if the changes I accept don't go through immediately, don't panic. Also, while reasoning for your changes is not necessary, it is appreciated and will make it far more likely that the change will be accepted.

After all changes are collected and aggregated, I will post patchnotes in here and James will paste them ingame to keep everyone up to date on all changes.

Balance is decided on whats best for new players over whats best for the game so my pitch is this. One of the first units people buy is the creeper and the hardest gameplay mechanic to understand is power. Making it cost 800 power for 4 creeps is a bad idea. They got nerfed bad enough that it is just hurting the game.

I posted about this before but nothing was ever changed. Basically the old infantry were never looked at through all their nerfs and other game balances. All the old power costs are legacy hold overs that are now even worse than ever.

Unit:Light mines and Heavy minesStat: Heavy mines goes off only to heavy armor, Light mines can go off by light and / or medium armor and airmechs cant make the mines go off, only Osprey healing beam.Reasoning: Mines dont get use often cause most times airmechs just walk over them and that just waste time and money to put them down, there a counter to mines but why use them when you can walk over it with little effort. Mines can be counter by repair units or rollers just like the arty, archy, bertha by jammer, sonya and this will make players think more strategic then just sending a death train of tanks.

Unit: GeminiStat: DPSCurrent amount: 107Desired amount: 123Reasoning: After doing some math i saw that the dillo has a bit better damage to cost ratio than longhorns even when having medium damage type. The gemini is far behind. With this change it is still lower in heavy damage than the LH nad dillo but not as useless in tank battles.The numbers:Dillo: 1,56 heavy dps per 100 creditsLH: 1,44 heavy dps per 100 creditsGemini: 1,14 heavy dps per 100 creditsSuggested Gemini: 1,30 heavy dps per 100 credits

Unit: GeminiStat: DPSCurrent amount: 107Desired amount: 123Reasoning: After doing some math i saw that the dillo has a bit better damage to cost ratio than longhorns even when having medium damage type. The gemini is far behind. With this change it is still lower in heavy damage than the LH nad dillo but not as useless in tank battles.The numbers:Dillo: 1,56 heavy dps per 100 creditsLH: 1,44 heavy dps per 100 creditsGemini: 1,14 heavy dps per 100 creditsSuggested Gemini: 1,30 heavy dps per 100 credits

This is a problem with dillo, not gemini; though a buff to gemini would make a bit of sense!

Unit: GeminiStat: DPSCurrent amount: 107Desired amount: 123Reasoning: After doing some math i saw that the dillo has a bit better damage to cost ratio than longhorns even when having medium damage type. The gemini is far behind. With this change it is still lower in heavy damage than the LH nad dillo but not as useless in tank battles.The numbers:Dillo: 1,56 heavy dps per 100 creditsLH: 1,44 heavy dps per 100 creditsGemini: 1,14 heavy dps per 100 creditsSuggested Gemini: 1,30 heavy dps per 100 credits

This is a problem with dillo, not gemini; though a buff to gemini would make a bit of sense!

This is why its bad to have someone who doesn't play do balance stuff. If all 3 tanks are used the same way then one tanks will always be better than the other two. Right now Armadillo and longhorn are fine. I use each in a different load out, longhorn can be your solo tank without having goliath when used with light support and dillo can be a light tank/support with a goliath as your heavy tank.

Instead of changing cost, dps, hitpoints and speed improve what sets the gemini apart. Up its turret rotation speed by like 33% so it really accels at shooting airmechs and light units.

This is why its bad to have someone who doesn't play do balance stuff.

What a joke! Comments like this only make you look arrogant; they don't hold ground. You stand behind your ability to take advantage of good units and act as if it makes you something more than what you are. I never said longhorns are bad, just that they do not compare to dillos. Their (LH) usage only really lies with osprey or helix for the health density for osprey and lower total weight/damage capabilities on the fortress (dillos are still phenomenally better against outposts).For the record, I don't see you on any time I am, so I could say the same about you and it would hold just as much worth/correctness (none).

On topic, the reason the turret speed is so low is because it was grandfathered in from back when gemini was the heavier tank than longhorn, and that was one of the balancing factors. I do agree that reverting the turret rotation speed would be a good idea.

Actually the reason Otakuma is perfect for this is because it's all about interfacing with the players and trying to sort out who is asking for what and why. The mandate is to be quite open about trying different things and then testing them to see if they work or not, then make more changes. It's not even about making the best change right away, because it becomes like a shell game.

The position to collect feedback and decide on a set of changes is much more about being a diplomat than taking the game in a specific agenda. Making lots of small changes with testing in between is the safest way to get there.